Melinda doesn't exactly state the facts of the Elizabeth Dole situation thoroughly, in order to score the usual points off those hysterical conservative, for the benefit of her evolved, not very skeptical audience. Dole's opponent Hagan attended a fund-raiser at the home of Woody Kaplan, the Boston founder of a group smugly called 'Godless Americans'. So Dole's usage of the term was not invented by her; it was the self-description of one of candidate Hagan's political associates and financial contributors, contrary to the impression Henneberg tries to leave on her credulous readers. Kaplan was not just one of a couple of atheists among the organizers, but the principal organizer. Hagan is not naive, she undoubtedly knew who Kaplan was, and I imagine she didn't broadcast this sort of thing, which goes on all the time in liberal-left politics, to voters back home. Liberal candidates from flyover land seldom are called to account for their financial obligations to their wealthy masters on the East and West Coasts, and an obliging press does not make much of it, either.

Henneberg thus does the old 'she's not a supporter of the political agenda of atheists, but even if she is, she's not an atheist herself, but even if she is, it's OK' line of defense of numbingly predictable and robotic media types who principal mission is to have the backs of their political allies. Henneberg would be more interesting if she could acknowledge that Democratic candidates often campaign as much more moderate than they really are, and that citizen suspicion of politicians who say one thing to their glittering Malibu-to-Martha's Vineyard hosts and another to the person on the street is probably a reasonable attitude.

Aren't atheists Americans? Is ther something wrong with being an atheist? Did Hagan ever say she was supporting taking "Under God" out of the pledge of allegience? (as Ms. Dole wants us to believe?

The ad is sleezy. It's just that Republicans, who have lived in the gutter since Lee Atwater, no longer know how to campaign any other way.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you defend an attack ad that uses a fake voice and fake quote of the person it is attacking. So, what if Hagan took campaign contributions from an atheist group? This does not mean that she is an atheist, but beyond that, the point of the ad went beyond what was necessary to suggest that atheists are evil and that Hagan is one of them. For that reason that ad was lower than low.

You seem to believe in some terribly biased MSM conspiracy against poor, innocent republicans, but you fail to see how these same republicans are effectively mounting a witch hunt to root out people who they say aren't "real Americans" and "God fearing Americans" and "patriotic Americans". You accuse democrats of "campaigning as much more moderate than they really are" but it is republicans that have been successfully campaigning as much more right leaning than they are and are often willing to stoop to new lows to get a vote.

What's smug about calling a group "Godless Americans"? It's accurate. The members of the group do not believe in a god, thus they are godless.

What's actually smug here is the way conservative politicians characterize nonbelievers.

Where do you guys get your facts? It's my understanding Hagan attended a fundraiser organized by some 40 people, ONE of whom is associated with the group Godless America. The group is not the issue, the ad's suggestion that the group is behind Hagan's campaign, especially when it's toxic in the south, is.

Contrary to the footage in the ad, there's no indication she slinked in, nor hid her attendance -- and the voice certainly wasn't Hagan's. Indeed, most of the footage had nothing to do with her campaign. That's what's wrong with the ad.

...And the fact that it insinuates that atheists/agnostics are sinister fiends. They might as well have had Boris and Natasha gloating in the corner.

For the record, the head of 'Godless Americans' hosted the fund-raiser, so you guys are still being ingenuous about the prominence of his role. Any candidate with brains has the host and site checked out before attending. And apparently Hagan felt there might be something wrong with associating herself so closely with an atheist-activist - after it was revealed, of course - because she felt the need to reassert her Christianity when someone made an issue of the party. This little flap is about politicians (of both parties) who, like Obama, speak one way in private to party activists, and another way to generic swing voters. If Melinda is truly scandalized by the GOP ad and feels it's impossible to go lower, she either hasn't been around much, or has her partisan blinkers on. This is the genre of liberal pleading that runs something like "My candidate didn't say it, but even if he did, he didn't believe it, but even if he does, what's wrong with that?", appropriate to the party of the criminal defense bar.

Liberals, my god. They routinely compare their opponents to the Nazi Party and the KKK, and think this is within the realm of civilized discourse, even humorous, though it is borderline obscene to compare themselves implicitly to the victims of those groups. Let their opponents respond in kind, Ann Coulter-style, and they shriek like Victorian maidens exposed to a bare-chested stableboy. Politics ain't beanbag. Don't get those panties in a bunch. I have relatives and friends on both sides of the aisle, and I can tell you that the Dems have long given as well as they get - they're just more likely to scream 'hate speech!' when disagreed with.

Maybe the Republicans will eventually figure out that when you try to smear shit, you shouldn't be surprised when more of it sticks to you than to your intended target.

As you say, it ain't beanbag.

I am horrified by how low Elizabeth Dole went. There is no defense for her "Godless" ads. According to multiple news outlets - including FOX News - the fundraiser was NOT sponsored by the group. It so happens that a member or two may have been there but so what? I'm sure if we dug deep enough, we could find an atheist attending a Republican fundraiser too. Dole has a deplorable record. Had I not already decided to vote for Hagan, this ad would have done it. There is no excuse for this kind of deception and hate mongering. As another poster said, this is particularly toxic in the south. I think it is a shame that Hagan had to respond with a defense of her Christian beliefs. As a SOUTHERN BAPTIST, I don't believe Christianity is a requirement to be a good President. I know "Christians" who are terrible people who don't seem to grasp the entire concept of Christian love and I know atheist who are wonderful, intelligent, caring, compassionate people. The implication that you are evil and plotting doom and gloom for the world because you do not believe in God is disgusting to me. And while I'm on my soapbox, as a 40 year old adult, I haven't been in a situation where the Pledge of Allegiance was spoken in decades. So, big whoop if they take "under God" out. Do we really reasonably think that taking those words out will suddenly turn us Christians into nonChristians? Do we really think the Pledge of Allegiance carries that much power? Please. This is one of those issues people become riled up about but, in the long run, seriously how important is it? Let's not forget that "under God" was added in the fifties during McCarthyism. I'm not really thinking that's what saved our country from Communism. More importantly, let's not forget that this country was founded on, among other principles freedom of religion, not freedom of Christianity but freedom of religion. To exclude the not that small population that don't believe in God - or the same God - is a slap to their freedom of religion and their patriotism. I'm sure the blood of other fine patriots who happened not to be Christians has been spilled all over our battlefields around the world. Off the soapbox now . . . and still not voting for Dole.

I'm pretty sure you meant "disingenuous" not "ingenuous," but anyway you're side stepping the fact that this ad is demeaning to non-theistic people, though apparently you share this sentiment considering the bigoted sideswipes evident in your first post.

To Ubu,

My dictionary defines 'ingenuous' as naive and trusting and 'disingenuous' as fake-naive and trusting. Take your pick. Your suggestion is probably better.

What 'bigoted sideswipes' do you refer to, there, Ubu? Is this one of those predictable things where people leaning to the left accuse anyone who disagrees with them as 'bigoted'? I sense that you can do better. Give independent-minded readers some quotes that go beyond the vocabulary of the several of the progressive and tolerant posts in the above thread.

Bottom line, it shouldn't MATTER if a campaign event is funded by Christians, Atheists or... pastry chefs, for goodness' sake! I ask you--would Dole run an ad about her opponent's fundraiser if it was hosted by a Jewish organization? Why not make the issue Hagan raising money out-of-state? Why focus so harshly on this "godless" connection? Answer that question, and you'll see what is so awful and insulting about the ad. And why anyone who defends it is just offensive and ignorant.

And to think, I was going to vote for Elizabeth Dole in the 1999 NH primaries, before she dropped out. Well, we can't be right all the time.

I called you bigoted because all your responses drip with the assumption that it is intrinsically wrong for a politician to associate with an atheist group. You still did not explain why you think calling a group "Godless Americans" is smug when it seems to be an accurate title. Is it just the very act of someone being godless that irks you and causes you to view them as smug?

"So Dole's usage of the term was not invented by her; it was the self-description of one of candidate Hagan's political associates and financial contributors, contrary to the impression Henneberg tries to leave on her credulous readers."

But the faux-Hagan at the end of the spot exclaiming "There is no God!" was an invention, and that, more than anything else, separated this from the run-of-the-mill attack ad. Perhaps it's just me, but it seems that perhaps this is being ignored to score the usual points off allegedly hypocritical liberals, for the benefit of conservatives who feel the need be victims of people more intellectual than they.

"For the record, the head of 'Godless Americans' hosted the fund-raiser"

The head of Godless Americans is Ellen Johnson (who, incidentally, is the woman saying "There is no God" at the end of the commercial.) Woody Kaplan is a part-time adviser to Godless Americans PAC, as well as being advisory board chair of the non-smugly-named Secular Coalition for America, founder of Civil Liberties List, and president of the First Amendment Foundation. (Imagine if the ad was "Kay Hagan takes First Amendment money...") Kaplan hosted the fund-raiser; Johnson didn't have anything to do with it.

" Any candidate with brains has the host and site checked out before attending."

I checked the site, which is how I know all this, and you didn't. Draw your own conclusions.